Salida, Jayson M.

BSEDE – IV

English 140 – Introduction to Stylistics TTh (10:30 – 12:00)

Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday

A. Authority

a.1 Background as Theorist/Practitioner

Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday or M.A.K. Halliday (born

13 April 1925) is a British-born Australian linguist who developed the

internationally influential Systemic-Functional Linguistic Model of Language.

Halliday is notable for his grammatical theory and descriptions. Across his career

he has proven and described language as a semiotic system, "not in the sense of

a system of signs, but a systemic resource for meaning". In 2003, he published a

paper setting out the accumulated principles of his theory, which arose as he

engaged with many different language-related problems. Halliday’s conception of

grammar – or "lexicogrammar", a term he coined to argue that lexis and grammar

are part of the same phenomenon – that language is a ‘meaning potential’, by

extension, he defines linguistics as the study of "how people exchange meanings

by 'languaging’ and describes himself as a generalist for the fact that he has tried

"to look at language from every possible vantage point", and has described his

work as "wandering the highways and byways of language".

Halliday was teaching Chinese since year 1945. After thirteen years of

teaching, he shifted his interest to linguistics and developed Systemic Functional

Linguistics elaborating on the foundations laid by his British teacher J. R. Firth, a

linguist who established linguistics as a discipline in Great Britain, and a group of

European linguists of the early twentieth century, the Prague school. He worked

in various language studies, both theoretical and applied, and has been

concerned with applying the understanding of the basic principles of language to

the theory and practices of education, and followed Firth in distinguishing

theoretical from descriptive categories in linguistics which are set up in the

description of particular languages. He believes that ‘theoretical categories, and

their interrelations, take an abstract model of language which are interlocking and

mutually defining.

Halliday rejected the claims about language being associated with the

generative tradition. According to him, “language cannot be equated with 'the set

of all grammatical sentences', whether that set is conceived of as finite or

infinite", and also rejected the use of formal logic in linguistic theories as

"irrelevant to the understanding of language" and the use of such approaches as

"disastrous for linguistics". Halliday also believes that once dichotomies are set

up, the problem arose of locating and maintaining the boundaries between them,

specifically on the whole series of dichotomies that Chomsky had introduced not

only between syntax and semantics but also between grammar and lexis,

language and thought, competence and performance.

In short, for Halliday, a language is made up of more-or-less closed

“systems” of words and grammatical structures, with our vocabulary constituting

a relatively open system. From these systems, speakers make selections in

order to make “wordings” and “meanings”. The systems of wordings and

meanings of a language user reflect the social and cultural context of the

language as well as the immediate situation. So the meanings that a speaker can

encode, although they may be in some sense new, are heavily forced by the

regular nature of the situations of use.

a.2 Theories/ Concepts

M.A.K Halliday has worked with different concepts in the aspect of

language. He has developed a comprehensive and coherent theory of language,

social interaction and indeed society that challenged most accepted ways of

thinking about language up to his time. His functional meaning-based approach

has allowed him to account for child language development, second language

acquisition, language variation, language in the school curriculum, especially with

regard to literacy development, language in science, and generally, the key role

of language in education. The linguistic theories and concepts he introduced had

contributed a lot not just in the field of language itself but also in language

learning. Some concepts include the following:

 Systemic-Functional Linguistic Theory/ Grammar

Systemic-Functional Linguistics (SFL) is an approach to language

developed mainly in the U.K. during the 1960s, and later in Australia. The

approach is now used world-wide, particularly in language education, and for

purposes of discourse analysis. While many of the linguistic theories in the

world today are concerned with language as a mental process, SFL is more

closely aligned with Sociology: it explores how language is used in social

 contexts to achieve particular goals. In terms of data, it does not address how

language is processed or represented within the human brain, but rather

looks at the discourses we produce (whether spoken or written), and the

contexts of the production of these texts. Because it is concerned with

language use, SFL places higher importance on language function (what it is

used for) than on language structure (how it is composed).

 Eco-linguistics

Halliday is widely regarded as a pioneer of eco-critical discourse

analysis after an influential lecture entitled “New Ways of Meaning: the

Challenge to Applied Linguistics” at the Association Internationale de

LinguistiqueAppliquée, (AILA or otherwise Applied Linguistics Association)

conference in Saloniki in 1990, which was also published in The

Ecolinguistics Reader edited by Alwin Fill and Peter Muhlhausler in the year

2001. The main example he gives in this paper is the widespread metaphor of

economic growth; he described how the English language has become

pervaded with terms such as large, grow, tall, all of which are implicitly

evaluated as positive and good – despite inevitably negative consequences

for the ecology. This also explores how the things around the environment

contribute to the meaning of the text or the language.

B. Discussion

b.1 Theory/ Concept with Example

The Systemic-Functional Linguistic Theory/ Grammar by M.A.K Halliday

A theory of language centred around the notion of language function.

While SFL accounts for the syntactic structure of language, it places the function

of language as central (what language does, and how it does it), in preference to

more structural approaches, which place the elements of language and their

combinations as central. SFL starts at social context, and looks at how language

both acts upon, and is constrained by, this social context. Systemic-Functional

linguistics is focused on deriving grammatical, syntactic and textual structures

from the ways in which language is used.

SFL was developed to address the needs of language teaching/learning.

This approach contrasts with more formal approaches that are primarily

concerned with formal structures, such as phonemes or sentence. This theory

also supports the Systematic-Functional Grammar or SFG which helps us

describe how language is used between people, which contrasts with traditional

grammar that prescribes rules for using language.

For Halliday, a central theoretical principle is then that any act of

communication involves choices. Language is a system, and the choices

available in any language variety are mapped using the representation tool of the

"system network". Systemic functional linguistics is also "functional" because it

considers language to have evolved under the pressure of the particular

functions that the language system has to serve. Functions, therefore, contribute

a lot on the structure and organisation of language at all levels, which is said to

be achieved via metafunctions: one construes experience (meanings about the

outer and inner worlds); one enacts social relations (meanings concerned with

interpersonal relations), and one weaves together of these two functions to

create text (the wording).

A central notion is 'stratification', such that language is analyzed in terms

of four strata: Context, Semantics, Lexico-Grammar and Phonology.

Context

This is concern with the Field (what is going on), Tenor (the social roles

and relationships between the participants), and the Mode (aspects of the

channel of communication, e.g., monologic/dialogic, spoken/written, +/- visual-

contact, etc.).

Semantics

This includes what is usually called 'pragmatics'. Semantics is divided into

three components:

 Ideational Semantics: the representation of the ideational content (of

clauses, or of whole texts)

 Interpersonal Semantics:

- Sentence level: speech-acts (called ‘speech functions’)

 - Discourse level: Organisation of sequences of speech-acts into

exchanges, changes turns, etc. Also, analysis of evaluations in text

(Appraisal theory Appraisal theory)

 Textual Semantics: how the text is organised as a message:

- Generic Structure: the staging of a text, e.g., as Introduction, Body,

Conclusions

- Rhetorical Structure: organising of sentences as facilitating others (e.g.

Evidence, Example, Result, etc.)

- Thematic Progression: How the selections of themes throughout a text

are organised to help the reader understand what the text is about.

Lexico-Grammar

This is concern with the the syntactic organization of words into

utterances. Even here, a functional approach is taken, involving analysis of the

utterance in terms of roles such as Actor, Agent/Medium, Theme, Mood, etc.

Phonology

This refers to sounds uttered by human voice in speech including the

various distinctions, modifications, and combinations of tones.

Systemic Grammar breaks down into three main areas:

1. Mood: Analysis of the clause using more traditional syntactic functions:

2. Transitivity: analysis of the clause in terms of who is doing what to whom:

3. Theme: Analysis of the clause in terms of message structure:

 SFL describes three main functions of language, each organized by its

own system network:

Experiential meaning

Representation of experience. Speakers represent their experience by the

content component of language mainly in terms of participating entities,

processes and circumstances. Example,

Material Process
Chia bought some curry yesterday.
Actor Process Goal Circumstance
Relational Process (Possessive)
Emma has a Wii console.
Carrier Process Attribute
Relational Process (Intensive)
Emma is the prettiest
Carrier Process Attribute.
Relational Process (Circumstancial)
The deadline is on Tuesday.
Carrier Process Attribute
Mental Process
David liked the headphones.
Sensor Process Phenonmenon

Behavioural Process
Joe sang the song.
Behaver Process
Existential Process
There was a boy.
Process Existent
Verbal Process
Allan said you should read.
Sayer Process Verbiage
 Interpersonal meaning

Social interaction. Speakers use language to act, e.g. ask questions, given

information, issue a command etc. Language also expresses the speaker’s

subjective judgments and opinions. The principle grammatical system here is the

MOOD network, within which is a choice between imperative and indicative.

According to Chia Suan Chong (2011), the Mood carries the interpersonal

functions of the clause and consists of Subject+Finite. The Subject is realised by

a nominal group that the speaker gives responsibility to for the validity of the

clause (ibid), while the Finite is realised by the first of the verbal group. The rest

of the verbal group is the Predicator, which forms part of the Residue. A clause

thus consists of Mood+Residue. The Mood element can be identified in Mood

tags (pedagogically, question tags). Example,

Josh can Speak English.

Subject Finite Predicator Complement
Mood Residue
Josh can Speak English, can't he?
Subject Finite Predicator Complement Finite Subject
Mood Residue Mood Tag

Textual meaning

Relevance in context. Speakers create text by indicating topic and

relevance in how they organize language. This is made up of theme and rheme.

The Theme is the departure point the speaker has chosen for his/her text. In

English, the Theme, on which the clause depends for its orientation within the
 context, takes initial position in the clause. The Rheme makes up the thematic

structure of a clause (Chia Suan chong, 2011). Example,

Theme and Rheme

Chia bought some curry yesterday.
Theme Rheme….

SFL in the context of Child Language Development

Halliday identifies seven functions that language has for children in their

early years. For him, children are more motivated to develop language because it

serves certain purpose for them. The first four functions help the child to satisfy

physical, emotional, and social needs.

1.Instrumental

This is when the child uses language to express their needs.

e.g. "milk".

2.Regulatory

This is where language is used to tell others what to do.

e.g. "go away"

3.Interactional

Here language is used to make contact with others and form relationships.

e.g. Babies talking using their way of speaking, or their own language.
4. Personal

This is use of language to express feelings, opinions, and individual

identity.

e.g. “Me, good girl”

5. Heuristic

This is when language is used to gain knowledge about his environment

e.g. “Why do the moon keeps on following me?”

6.Imaginative

Here language is used to tell stories, jokes,and to create an imaginary

environment.

e.g. fairy tales or talking to his toys

7. Representational

The use of language to convey facts and information.

e.g. when a child hears the word “Jollibee”, it automatically brings out the joy in

him.

b.2 Criticism on Theory/ Concept

According to Chia Suan Chong (2011), language is used to express

meanings and perform various functions in different contexts and situations of

our daily lives. If grammar is ‘the way in which a language is organised’ (Butt et
al, 2000), SFG attempts to explain and describe the organisation of the

‘meaning-making resources’ (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004). The Systemic-

Functional Linguistic Theory/ Grammar is centred on the schemata that the

language’s meaning is governed by its system and function. This theory of

Halliday is closely resembled with Ferdinand De Saussure’s concept of

‘Paradigmatic’ and ‘Syntagmatic’ relations in language. The syntagmatic relation

refers to the possibilities of combination of words while the paradigmatic relation

refers to selection of functional contrasts - they involve differentiation. However,

the SFL/G is in contrast with Chomsky’s Universal Grammar. Chomsky regards

grammar as autonomous from meaning and that each language has its own

system of grammatical rules. Halliday believes that grammar is more of

‘resources’ than of ‘rules’.

The SFL theory aims at providing explanation regarding the actual

occurrence of meaning in a certain sentence, phrase or even morpheme.

Halliday might have been thinking optimistically upon establishing this theory.

However, relatively, in some cases, the SFL could also be seen as an

inadequate tool for universal interpretation. Like if we consider the factors

involved in the SFL such as the society, culture, environment, etc., these things

will tell us that there might be biases to the part of the speakers and

discrimination and absence of transparency in the part of the receivers for the

reason that the speaker is greatly influenced by the culture, the environment, the

society and even experiences which could possibly be different from what kind of

culture, environment, society and experiences other people have. Thus, there
exists a potential problem with regards to the interpretation of meaning. And in

severe cases, for people having no enough knowledge about registers, they

might find problems on how to interpret or react to the specific use of the

language.

Another issue that could be ascribed in this theory is the language and the

speaker’s impact to the receivers. For an instance, media is an avenue in airing

information using the language, and for some cases, how the language was used

affects the receivers of the information, considering also that the people in the

media may be biased with how they use the language. Another instance is for a

child’s language development, children, as we all know, creates their own words

in attribution to some meaning, in layman’s term we call this ‘baby-talk’ or baby’s

language. If a child continues to use the language he/she is using, and if parents

tolerate how their children use the language, there might be a potential problem

to the part of the children for the reason that they might carry the effects of this

attribution process as they age.

The SFL might be leading to minimal issues, however, this also has silver

linings, most especially in the field of language in teaching. This theory has been

supporting some approaches in language teaching such as ‘The Oral Approach

and the Situational Language Teaching’ by Palmer and Hornby; ‘Communicative

Language Teaching’ by D.A Wilkins; and ‘Community Language Learning’ by

Curran which emphasize learning language though understanding its nature,

functions and usage. Based also on how I understood the idea of this theory,

although this may lead to relatively varied interpretations when applied to

literature, yet this provides avenue for deeper critical hermeneutics of literary

works.

To sum it up, there either could be advantages and inadequacies seen in

this theory, however, Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday is lucid on his point

and aim in proposing this theory which is to provide explanations and

manifestations that there is something more beyond how we conventionally see

language and grammar. As a language learner, user and future language

teacher, this theory is of great aid in the light of using, understanding and

exploiting the dynamic language we continuously acquire and use.

 REFERENCES

Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics for beginners. Paradigmatics and Syntagmatics. Retrieved

http://visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/sem03.html
Chappell, Phil. Doing Some Thinking. Introduction to Systemic-Functional Grammar.Ret
rieved at https://hoprea.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/an-introduction-to-systemic-
functional-grammar-by-phil-chappell/
Chia Suan Chong. (2011). What is systemic-Functional Grammar?. Retrieved at http:

//chiasuanchong.com/2011/05/17/what-is-systemic-functional-grammar-part-1/

Chia Suan Chong. (2011). The Interpersonal Metafunction. Retrieved at http://chiasuan

-chong.com/2011/05/22/systemic-functional-grammar-part-2-the-interpersonal-

metafunction/

Chia Suan Chong. (2011). The Textual Metafunction. Retrieved a htttp://chiasuansong.

com/2011/06/15/systemic-functional-grammar-part-4-the-textual

- meta function-conclusion/

Fawcett, Robin P. Systemic Functional Grammar as a formal model of language:a Micro

-grammar for some central elements of the English clause. Cardiff University @
fawcett@cardiff.ac.uk
Halliday, M.A.K, revised by Matthiessen, (2014)Christian M.I.M. Halliday’s Introduction

to Functional Grammar: Fourth Edition. Routledge, 2 Park Square, Milton Park,

Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

Jones, Alan. International House Journal of Education and Development. Hallidayan Lin
- guistics Today, Michael Halliday: An Appreciation by Alan Jones. Retrieved at
http://ihjournal.com/michael-halliday-an-appreciation
Lin, Francis and Alex X. Peng. Systemic Functional Grammar and construction Gram
-mar. School of Foreign Languages and Literatures / Beijing Normal University.
Retrieved at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ920998.pdf
McCarthy, Alan. Functional Grammar ‘An Innocent Thug?’ An investigation into contras

-ting news reports using Systemic Functional Grammar Analysis. Retrieved at

http://www.pucsp.br/sfc/proceedings/Artigos%20pdf/16th_lin_peng_331a347.pdf

O’Donnell, Mick. Language, Function, Cognition:Part 2. Systemic Functional Linguistics.

Modulo VI bis, 311 Michael.odonnell@uam.es.
Ruddick, Michael. A Comparative Analysis of Two Texts using Halliday’s Systemic Func
-tional Linguistics. University of Birmingham.
Simpson, Paul. 2004. Stylistics A Resource Book for Students. Jakobson’s Poetic Func

-tion. Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE.

Wordpress.com. (2010). Halliday and Langauge Development. Representing M. A. K.

Halliday’s The Language of Early Childhood. Retrieved at https://antbarra.word

-press.com/2010/05/04/halliday-and-language-development/